TCI Regional Policy Design Stakeholder Submissions

TCI could be well served to consider climate implications of a range of currently utilized U.S. transportation fuels and fuel switch solutions, based on Department of Energy, Department of Transportation, EPA and California longstanding efforts to reduce transportation emissions and reduce greenhouse gas emissions from transportation. In the absence of metrics, the solutions proposed or modeled may be high cost and low impact. If TCI would like help there are a range of technologies that could be considered that could reduce emissions far greater than 19% over a decade. With transportation carbon targeting solutions looking at bang-for-the-buck or taking a greenhouse gas reduction as a metric strategy, deeper cuts could be seen on a faster timescale. Public sources of information from California Low Carbon Fuel Standard is a good peer-state guide. The federal Renewable Fuel Standard is the other long evaluated public tool tracking real metrics. Consider goal of tracking and reducing transportation greenhouse gas emissions with a wider all hands on deck approach rather than limited strategies and see if a TCI model can seek larger benefit for the public good. Consider a policy that has a larger emissions reduction strategy in the region such as 25% and continual evaluation. TCI materials miss a lot of science of transportation emission studies and additional advisors could help the TCI team. Clean transportation investment options seem pretty limited and could use peer review from state clean transportation programs. In Virginia our clean fuel program at Virginia Clean Cities reduces 175,000,000 tons annually and TCI should revisit 2032 goals of 62 total possible million metric tons reduced in 25% scenario to see if this regulatory action could meet or far exceed current single state voluntary annual emission reductions programs - considering the baseline of clean fuel programs goals could be increased with full coordination with DOT and Energy agencies or checking back at assumptions.

Do whatever you can to lower emissions. Pennies today aren’t worth destroying our planet tomorrow.

We can cut poverty and pollution at the same time! If the needs of low income people are not addressed, they will be forced into making choices which undermine the wonderful goals of this project. Choices such as driving highly polluting vehicles or being susceptible to believing the misinformation of carbon polluters.
I urge you to move forward with a regional program that prioritizes the needs of communities overburdened with pollution and underserved with transportation options.
Thank you.

Dear Governor Scott,
Our nation has neglected climate change to the point of imminent crisis proportions. Our "brave little state" and every one of us needs to step up and change the things we can. The TCI addresses 40% of our emissions and is a perfect place for you to start. Please, please, please do not follow Sununu's and trump's anti-environmental examples. Do not be just another spineless, Republican lackey. Vermont and Vermonters are counting on you.
Sincerely,
Deborah Martin
Norwich, Vermont

It is critical that Massachusetts addresses its climate emissions! Transportation emissions are 40% of the state’s overall climate emissions. Thus, it is important that we tackle them and I am glad there is an effort to do this. Whatever we do, though, has to be effective and based on science, has to be equitable and must require an honest assessment of the challenges ahead.

Honesty
Starting with honest assessments, the current proposals are described as cutting transportation emissions by 25%. A quick look at supporting TCI analysis documents shows that the state’s business-as-usual transportation emissions are expected to drop 19% over a decade. But this is actually the rosiest possibility. It might only be 6%. On top a very optimistic expectation of business-as-usual transportation emissions, if the TCI process reduces emissions an additional 6%, then, we would get 25% reductions. But states are being asked if they want to reduce emissions 6%, 3% or only 1% over business-as-usual transportation emissions. So, 25% reductions over a decade is based on totally rosy numbers (business-as-usual reductions of 19% and the states all choose bold(?) action to get an additional 6% reductions. Actually, the results might, with equal probability, only be 7% reductions over a decade, or less!

How can have an honest conversation in the state about TCI if TCI proponents are providing misleading information about emissions reductions? Information must be transparent and honest. In this era of misinformation and given the seriousness of the effects of climate change, we cannot afford to be less than honest with ourselves about the potential results of different efforts to address climate change.

Effectiveness
The TCI process must provide policy options that address science-based requirements for climate mitigation which limits global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. That will require emissions reductions around the globe and in Massachusetts on the order of 40% of current emissions levels per decade. The TCI process is only considering efforts to reduce transportation climate emissions by 1%, 3% or 6% over business-as-usual emissions reductions, over a decade. And we have no assurance at all that business-as-usual emissions reductions will be significant. This is totally unacceptable! We need much steeper emissions reductions than those TCI is considering!

Equity
The TCI process must assure that policy options that address transportation needs in each state are equitable in the sense that they address the impacts policies on low-income communities, environmental justice communities and other disproportionately affects groups. Policies must address equity regarding access to public transportation, cost-effectiveness of public transportation, traffic congestion and its effects, the reduction of transportation climate emissions and related health impacts, impacts on access to new jobs, access to greener transportation options, and access to greener automobile technologies.

We need to be honest about the magnitude of the problem, the effort needed to solve it and the impact that our policies are having. That TCI has created a consortium of states trying to act in concert to address climate emissions from transportation is laudable. Now it needs to step up to the challenge and design effective and equitable policies to address it.

The time has passed to do something and take credit for it. It is time to stand up for our children and do what is needed.

There is no issue more important than doing EVERYTHING possible to clean the dirty polluted methods caused by unconscious transportation methods and the effects it has on children, especially, humanity, animals and the environment. Cleaning up the environment is my number one issue of importance.

My name is Pam Piper. I am a resident of Norwich and a member of the Norwich Congregational Church Climate Action Group.
Climate Change poses an ongoing and grave threat to the people and environments that form Vermont. We know that transportation is VT’s highest source of carbon emissions. I take that to heart everyday as I work to lower my carbon footprint; driving less and walking more, carpooling and maintaining my vehicle to maximize its fuel efficiency. I do this because it is the right thing to do. I also know that my individual actions alone cannot reverse rising CO2 levels.
As a citizen of this incredible state I see that we have an opportunity to do the “right thing” by joining in with the Transportation & Climate Initiative. It is an opportunity to tackle our high emission levels and to generate the funds necessary to implement transportation solutions that will benefit all Vermonters. This type of program is not new. RGGI, instituted in 2008, has proven to be successful in reducing carbon pollution and raising necessary funds to invest in important programs such as weatherization. As a recently retired child welfare worker it gives me great joy to volunteer in weatherization projects that make the homes of low-income Vermonters warmer and more energy efficient. The funding from RGGI enables this work to be done. We can do the same in the transportation sector with TCI.
At a recent informational meeting hosted by state agencies I was impressed by the work that has already gone into building the framework for TCI. Learning that all the “cap reduction” scenarios assessed, led to overall environmental, health and economic benefits, further convinced me that this is the right next step for VT. I understand that there is concern that this will simply be seen as a gas tax, but truth be told I’m willing to pay more when the outcomes are so critical and the long-term benefits, so far reaching.
I support our inclusion in TCI and believe that we can be a leader in tackling our transportation emissions. Being “at the table” with the other TCI states will allow us to do the right thing and I trust that we will be able to craft a VT product that treats all Vermonters equitably and creates a climate that we can thrive in.

“We can cut poverty and pollution at the same time. We urge you to move forward with a regional program that prioritizes the needs of communities overburdened with pollution and underserved in mobility options.”